Confessions of a Fish KillerA Vegan Health Article from All-Creatures.org

From

“Fishy,” apart from meaning “like a fish,” also means: Not
as expected, inspiring doubt or suspicion, dubious, questionable, suspect,
suspicious, shady, funny, odd, implausible, unlikely, not honest, and not
legitimate.

I fell in love with the ocean at age 5 (in 1952) after watching a film in
my kindergarten class about undersea life: fish, corals, giant clams, and
hermit crabs. When I was 12, I became a SCUBA diver, but my underwater
explorations were limited to the murky waters of Michigan lakes. During my
early teens, our family vacations were to the Outer Banks of North Carolina,
where we always included some deep sea fishing—catching and eating
flounders, blues, and Dorado. My first ocean SCUBA diving experience at age
18 was at John Pennekamp National Underwater Park in the Florida Keys—here
thousands of colorful fish swam through a forest of corals. I enjoyed this
experience so much that Mary and I returned to the Keys and more diving for
our honeymoon in 1972. That same year we moved to Hawaii. Here we collected
small tropical fish for our saltwater aquariums from the shallow waters
surrounding Oahu. Unfortunately, within a few days of being removed from
their natural environment, most of them we found floating belly-up.

For the first time I realized I was living with a grim conflict: I was a
fish lover and a fish killer. Once or twice a year for the next two decades,
I captured large edible fish like mahi-mahi, tuna, and salmon with lines and
spears in Hawaii and California. I considered it my right to eat them. The
constant drone about their health benefits from doctors and dietitians
helped me justify my slaughter of these amazing animals.

The oceans have changed over my sixty-year lifetime. Ninety percent of
the large fish—the ones that make baby fish—are gone. Thirty-eight percent
of all animal sea life, including bluefin tuna, Atlantic cod, Alaskan king
crab, and Pacific salmon have had their populations cut by more than 90%,
and seven percent of the fish species have become extinct.1 Because of the
rarity of blue fin tuna, the Japanese are now making some of their sushi
with beef. The price of fresh wild salmon has increased to $11 a pound, when
it’s available, which is only a few times a year. Fishing industries have
collapsed worldwide and many of coral reefs are now bleached and barren.
Reliable predictions warn that by the middle of this century (2048) all fish
and seafood species will have collapsed—they will be extinct or on the verge
of extinction.1

The human demand for fish as food has been the major reason for the
devastation of the oceans and part of that demand comes from the belief that
fish-eating is essential for good health. This is not correct—in fact, in
our polluted world, eating fish has become a well-established health hazard.

I Hated Fish Fridays

I grew up in the suburbs of Detroit, Michigan, in a neighborhood that was
predominately Catholic. That meant every Friday fish was served for dinner.
No matter how much it was breaded, salted, seasoned, and/or fried to
disguise the taste; come dinner time, I dreaded Fridays.

When consumers have a choice—like they do at every fast food
restaurant—between beef and chicken or fish—what do they choose? Considering
fish’s relative unpopularity, I would say most people don’t like the taste
of fish. The word “fishy” connotes a message of a quite unpleasant-smelling
sulphurous aroma that resembles fresh fish. Anchovies are synonymous with
bad taste—unless you like salt.

The taste of the flesh of a fish depends to a large extent upon that
fish’s diet. Many of the most popular fish; tuna, swordfish, salmon, and
rockfish, are carnivores, feeding off small unpleasant-tasting sea animals,
like anchovies, herring, and squid. But people have the ability to adapt
their taste buds and learn to like almost anything, even the repugnant odor
of sulfur.

Sulfur compounds are another reason for fish’s lack of gustatory appeal.
Rotten eggs and spoiled fish are malodors because of the hydrogen sulfide
gas that is released by bacterial actions. Sulfur also taints many well
waters. Foul body odors (halitosis, and smelly flatus and perspiration) are
primarily the result of sulfur compounds—the origin of this sulfur is our
diet in the form of sulfur-containing amino acids, like methionine. The
sulfur content of fish is particularly high, for example salmon has 12 times
more methionine than do sweet potatoes.

Seasonings make fish- and seafood-eating more tolerable. Most people
swallow these sea animals only after they are blackened on a barbecue,
smothered with cocktail sauce, or blended with bisque.

The Health Claims Are Fishy

Consumers are taught fish are their only reliable sources of essential
omega-3 fatty acids, called eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic
acid (DHA), and therefore they believe that by avoiding fish they would
suffer serious malnutrition. Sellers of fish oil supplements go so far as to
warn, “Supplementation with fish oils that are rich in EPA and DHA is
necessary to ensure you are receiving adequate amounts of these
nutritionally important fatty acids.”

Most health organizations worldwide, including the American Heart
Association, the American Medical Association, the American Diabetic
Association, the British Dietetic Association, and Australia’s leading
health research body, the National Health and Medical Research Council
(NHMRC) (to name a few) also recommend that people eat fish, primarily for
the omega-3 fats. These same groups also warn of the hazards of
methylmercury and other environmental contaminants in the fish—appearing
balanced.

Recommendations to eat fish are based on laboratory research, but originate
primarily from observations of various populations of people worldwide. For
example, the rate of heart disease among fish-eating populations, such as
the Japanese, is very low, and this has been attributed to the so-called
“good fats” they receive from eating fish. Researchers overlook the marked
differences between overall Western and Japanese diets. The primary
ingredient in the Japanese diet is rice and this is the reason they enjoy
better health, are trimmer, and more active. The small amount of fish eaten
daily is incidental.

But the “fish is health food” theory flourishes because, for many people
this is the easy road—simply add a serving or two of fatty fish to their
weekly diet—rather than giving up the real causes of heart disease. Don’t
think I overlooked the positive consequences of adding fish a couple of
times a week—it does replace some of roast beef, pork, cheese, and chicken
that would have otherwise been eaten.

Good Fats Are from Plants

The possibility of brain damage, especially to the unborn or young children,
strokes the emotional cords of our hearts.2 A number of writers claim that
only a diet based on seafoods can provide the necessary quantity of
essential fat (docosahexaenoic acid) to support the human brain and that a
switch to such a diet early in human evolution was critical to human brain
evolution.2,3 However, a critical review of this claim by John Langdon of
the departments of Biology and Anthropology of the University of
Indianapolis came to this conclusion, “There is no evidence that human diets
based on terrestrial food chains with traditional nursing practices fail to
provide adequate levels of DHA or other n-3 fatty acids. Consequently, the
hypothesis that DHA has been a limiting resource in human brain evolution
must be considered to be unsupported.”3

Only plants can make the omega-3 fats—fish don’t; nor do cows or people.
Alpha linolenic acid (ALA) is made by plants and converted into DHA by
infants and adults in sufficient amounts to supply all of our needs
including those for brain function and development. After all, the African
elephant with a brain volume of 3000 to 4000 cm3, compared to the human
brain of 1400 cm3, has no trouble making all the essential fats its brain,
and the rest of its huge body, needs from plant foods.3 You can safely
assume a comparatively puny human being can do the same.

Do Fish Have a Metallic Taste? Or Has My Fish-eating Caused Me Brain
Damage?

When discussing healthy brain development and fish, let’s not forget
mercury. It may be all in my mind, but I swear the last tuna I ate had a
metallic taste. Mercury is a natural element found in the earth, and is
released as industrial pollution during various manufacturing processes.
Much of this metallic substance accumulates in the rivers, streams and
oceans, and is converted in the environment into a highly toxic form called
methylmercury. In this organic form mercury becomes concentrated in the food
chain by processes referred to as bioaccumulation. Fish, especially those
predatory species high on the food chain, like, fresh water pike, walleye
and bass, and salt-water tuna, swordfish, and mackerel, become heavily
contaminated with mercury.

The consumption of mercury-contaminated fish is the main exposure for
people. Almost all of the mercury consumed is efficiently absorbed by the
intestinal tract. Since our bodies have no way of excreting this toxin,
mercury continues to accumulate throughout life, exerting its detrimental
effects. Serious health risks include damage to the nervous system, heart,
kidneys and immune system—particularly for young children and the developing
fetus.

The results of mercury poisoning for the brain are motor dysfunction, memory
loss, and learning disabilities; as well as depression-like behaviour.4 The
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) are advising women who may become pregnant, pregnant women, nursing
mothers, and young children to avoid some types of fish, and eat fish and
shellfish that are lower in mercury.5 Other toxic compounds, such as fat
soluble dioxins, and polychlorinated biphenyls, are also found in fish and
fish oils.6

Fish-Eating Does Not Decrease Heart Disease

Eating fish may be healthier for the heart for people in Western countries
simply because it replaces some of the saturated fats that would otherwise
be found in the livestock on their dinner plates. A study published in the
May 2007 issue of the American Journal of Cardiology came to this very
conclusion and reported, “The data supporting the inverse correlation of
fish or omega-3 fatty acid (eicosapentaenoic acid plus docosahexaenoic acid)
consumption and coronary heart disease are inconclusive and may be
confounded by other dietary and lifestyle factors.”7

The research published in our major medical journals, which says, “Fish are
bad for the heart,” somehow fails to influence doctors, dietitians, and
health organizations who are telling us how to live healthfully. Therefore,
the public rarely hears about the following dissenting research:

Two recent studies have shown that people with the higher amounts of mercury
in their bodies, caused primarily by fish-eating, have more heart trouble.
The first one, published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2002,
found that higher levels of mercury in toenail clippings predicted a greater
chance of future heart attacks.8 The next study looked at the mercury
content of the hair and found, “High content of mercury in hair may be a
risk factor for acute coronary events and CVD (coronary vascular disease),
CHD (coronary heart disease), and all-cause mortality in middle-aged eastern
Finnish men. Mercury may also attenuate the protective effects of fish on
cardiovascular health.”9 More plainly, the authors of this study concluded
the high mercury content negated the so-called protective effects of the
“good” fish fats (like EPA and DHA) on the blood vessels and heart. Those
people with the higher amounts of mercury in their hair (indicating more
consumption of fish) also had higher total cholesterol and LDL “bad”
cholesterol levels, and higher rates of hypertension and diabetes. Higher
blood cholesterol levels for fish-eaters should not be surprising since fish
has twice the amount of cholesterol as beef, chicken, and pork.

A recent study of a total of 3114 men under 70 years of age with angina
(chest pain due to clogged heart arteries) who had been advised to eat two
portions of oily fish each week or to take three fish oil capsules daily
were found to have a higher risk of cardiac death compared to men not given
this advice.10

Patients with coronary heart disease documented by angiograms received
either fish oil capsules or olive oil capsules for an average duration of 28
months.11 Fish oil lowered triglyceride levels by 30%, but not these
patients’ cholesterol. The amount of closure (stenosis) increased by 2.4%
and 2.6%, respectively. The authors concluded, “Fish oil treatment for 2
years does not promote major favorable changes in the diameter of
atherosclerotic coronary arteries."11

A recent review of 48 randomized controlled trials involving 36,913
participants taking fish oils or eating oily fish, found no health benefits
from these “healthy fats,” and concluded, “Long chain and shorter chain
omega 3 fats do not have a clear effect on total mortality, combined
cardiovascular events, or cancer.”12

The Underlying Reasons Fish Components May Cause Harm

The reason fish, high in omega-3 fats, are felt to protect people from heart
disease is that this kind of fat “thins” the blood and thereby helps prevent
a blood clot (thrombus) from forming in a heart artery and shutting off
circulation to the heart muscle. However, “good fat” from eating fish, thus
causing “good effects,” is only a small part of the story.

Much attention has been focused on the artery-damaging effects of the
environmental contaminant, mercury. Adverse effects of mercury on blood
vessels are from oxidative stress (free radical formation), inflammation,
thrombosis (blood clots), and muscle dysfunction of the blood vessel
walls.13 However, mercury contamination is not the whole story, and even if
“clean” fish were available—and they are not—fish-eating would still not be
heart healthy.

There are many qualities of fish which encourage heart disease. Fish are
high in cholesterol which elevates blood cholesterol.14 Even small doses of
fish oils have been shown to raise the “bad” LDL-cholesterol.15,16 Fish is
also loaded with sulfur-containing amino acids (like methionine) which raise
homocysteine levels in the body. Homocysteine is a well-accepted risk factor
for heart disease and feeding people methionine will cause dysfunction of
their arteries, which may promote blood vessel disease.17 (Remember, salmon
has 12 times more methionine than sweet potatoes.) Even fish oil alone can
increase homocysteine levels.18

Other Adverse Consequences from Consuming Fish

1) Fish cause a rise in blood cholesterol levels similar to the rise
caused by beef and pork.13

2) Their highly-acidic animal proteins accelerate calcium loss,19
contributing to osteoporosis and kidney stones. The addition of 5 ounces of
skipjack tuna (34 grams of animal protein) a day increases the loss of
calcium from the bones, into the urine, by 23%.20

3) No dietary fiber or digestible carbohydrates are present in fish—thus
having a negative impact on bowel function and physical endurance, like
winning a foot race.

4) Although omega-3 fats “thin” the blood, preventing thrombus formation
(heart attacks); this same anticoagulant activity can increase the risk of
bleeding complications from other sources, like a hemorrhagic stroke or an
auto accident.21

5) These good fats have anti-inflammatory properties, which can be
beneficial— reducing arthritis pain, for example, as well as
deleterious—causing immune suppression, increasing the risk of cancer and
infection.22,23 Omega-3 fish fats have been demonstrated to induce 10-fold
more metastases in number and 1000-fold in volume in an animal model of
colon cancer metastasis than does a low-fat diet.24

The cost of fresh wild fish and concern for the oceans has caused many
consumers to buy farmed fish—this may not be a wise decision. Farmed fish
are loaded with toxins because they are fed a diet of fish oils and fish
meal obtained from small pelagic fish which themselves contain high levels
of environmental chemicals. Farmed salmon, for example, have higher
contaminant loads than do wild caught salmon.28

Because of the higher cost of meals made with so-called good fats, farmed
fish are fed rations containing palm, linseed, rapeseed and other cheaper
oils. The ultimate fat composition of fish depends upon what they are fed.
Therefore, many farmed fish have a balance of fats that would not be
considered “heart healthy.”29

Other important issues that weigh heavily on the fish farming businesses
are the environment and animal rights. Wastes from fish cages, including
fecal matter and uneaten food, along with chemicals used in farming, such as
pesticides, herbicides, and antibiotics, are dumped into the oceans. When
fish and other organisms are kept in close proximity, they breed diseases.
In most cases farmed fish are carnivores, and their feed comes from the
ocean; for example, herring is used as salmon feed. Catching herring
depletes the food supply for the native fish, including salmon, trout, tuna,
grouper, and cod. And if you were wondering, fish do have feelings too30—and
life in a fish farm must be like living in prison, on death row.

I Am No Longer Conflicted or Confused

I have lived long enough to have witnessed the first-hand destruction of
our environment—it is real and now. I worry that in the very near future
when I want to take my grandchildren to see the wonders of the ocean that I
discovered in my youth, the sea life will be gone. By correcting
misinformation, the downward spiral devastating our oceans can be reversed.
The situation is not hopeless, not yet.

I know the truth about human nutritional needs. Therefore, I eat a diet
of starches, vegetables, and fruits and enjoy excellent health. Fish are not
health food. Every day I try to make choices that slow or reverse the loss
of our oceans; for example, I eat tofu tacos (see the April 2006 McDougall
newsletter)—they are far tastier and healthier than fish tacos.

By being informed, and making conscious choices, you can make a
difference too.

All-Creatures.org Health Position and Disclaimer

We began this archive as a means of assisting our
visitors in answering many of their health and diet questions, and in
encouraging them to take a pro-active part in their own health. We believe
the articles and information contained herein are true, but are not presenting
them as advice. We, personally, have found that a whole food vegan diet
has helped our own health, and simply wish to share with others the things we
have found. Each of us must make our own decisions, for it's our own
body. If you have a health problem, see your own physician.

Fair Use Notice: This document, and others on our web site, may contain copyrighted
material whose use has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owners.
We believe that this not-for-profit, educational use on the Web constitutes a fair use
of the copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law).
If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use,
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.